Thread Rating:
  • 3 Vote(s) - 3.67 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
PD 6531:2018
#1
So next time your BAFE assessor say can you just short out that loop

you can show him the newly published PD 6531:2018 and tell him to do one  Biggrin

available now at all bad bsi shops 

3.20 Simulation of fault conditions
Query
BS 5839‑1:2017, 39.2c) and 45.3l), state that at commissioning and periodic inspection and test respectively, all fault indicators and their circuits should be checked, where practicable, by simulation of fault conditions. Simulating all fault conditions would be time-consuming and, in the case of, for example, short circuit faults, could be detrimental to the system. Is it necessary to simulate every fault condition that is monitored by the system?

Answer
This is not necessary. Firstly, it should be noted that the recommendation contains the qualification “where practicable”; there are fault conditions (e.g. processor failure) that are not practicable to simulate. Moreover, the intention of the Committee was not to recommend simulating every possible fault condition. The primary purpose of this check is to ensure that audible and visual fault indicators operate correctly; this can be achieved by simulating a sample of faults (in a simple system, even just one fault condition). In particular, simulation of conditions such as open circuits or short circuit of wiring is unnecessary; a typical, suitable test would be, for example, to remove a detector head from its base, where this is practicable.
www.fia.uk.com

Technical Manager FIA

All comments and views are mine own and may not reflect the views of FIA
Reply
#2
Brilliant - Nice One Will

Take a head down it is
All posts are of my own opinion and knowledge and do not reflect the views of the Company I work for.
Reply
#3
Will
just to play devils advocate:-
Definition of practicable - Able to be done or put into practice successfully
"where practicable" is a matter of opinion and in the case of short circuiting a detection loop it is completely practicable unlike simulating a processor failure. Therefore when our BAFE assessor requests that we short a loop to test for short circuit fault reporting how can I refuse on the grounds that it isn't practicable. Don't get me wrong I would refuse based on previous experience - i.e. panel blows up!
Reply
#4
(02-05-2018, 06:37 PM)SAS LTD Wrote: Will
just to play devils advocate:-
Definition of practicable - Able to be done or put into practice successfully
"where practicable" is a matter of opinion and in the case of short circuiting a detection loop it is completely practicable unlike simulating a processor failure. Therefore when our BAFE assessor requests that we short a loop to test for short circuit fault reporting how can I refuse on the grounds that it isn't practicable. Don't get me wrong I would refuse based on previous experience - i.e. panel blows up!

well you just say....

you can show him the newly published PD 6531:2018 and quote

 3.20 Simulation of fault conditions
Query
BS 5839‑1:2017, 39.2c) and 45.3l), state that at commissioning and periodic inspection and test respectively, all fault indicators and their circuits should be checked, where practicable, by simulation of fault conditions. Simulating all fault conditions would be time-consuming and, in the case of, for example, short circuit faults, could be detrimental to the system. Is it necessary to simulate every fault condition that is monitored by the system?

Answer
This is not necessary. Firstly, it should be noted that the recommendation contains the qualification “where practicable”; there are fault conditions (e.g. processor failure) that are not practicable to simulate. Moreover, the intention of the Committee was not to recommend simulating every possible fault condition. The primary purpose of this check is to ensure that audible and visual fault indicators operate correctly; this can be achieved by simulating a sample of faults (in a simple system, even just one fault condition). In particular, simulation of conditions such as open circuits or short circuit of wiring is unnecessary; a typical, suitable test would be, for example, to remove a detector head from its base, where this is practicable.www.fia.uk.com
Jeremy Brookes
SAS Limited
07956 181351
Reply
#5
(02-05-2018, 06:37 PM)SAS LTD Wrote: Will
just to play devils advocate:-
Definition of practicable - Able to be done or put into practice successfully
"where practicable" is a matter of opinion and in the case of short circuiting a detection loop it is completely practicable unlike simulating a processor failure. Therefore when our BAFE assessor requests that we short a loop to test for short circuit fault reporting how can I refuse on the grounds that it isn't practicable. Don't get me wrong I would refuse based on previous experience - i.e. panel blows up!

and just to play angels advocate (is that correct  Huh i'm not sure but i'm going with it)

I agree with your definition of practicable.

but lets start at the beginning where in BS 5839-1 does it say do short circuit testing   Huh I'll wait while you read the standard
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
. (some while later)
{SPOILER ALERT!!!}
it doesn't 
but your nice BAFE auditor will say some like 45.3 l All fault indicators and their circuits should be checked, where practicable, by simulation of fault conditions. 
to be done at every service visit (6 monthly)

now my argument has always been this.

What is a fault indicator? and the best answer i can come up with is a that BS EM 54-2 calls an indicator "device which can change its state to give information" 
so a fault indicator must change state when there is a fault so that must be the fault LED and Buzzer so the clause now would read

All fault Led's and Buzzers and their circuits should be checked, where practicable, by simulation of fault conditions. 

now trying to work out what is meant by a circuit is easy as circuit is a defined word in the standard which means you should be able to replace the word with the definition and it still make sense (and for those keeping score circuits is 3.7 assembly of fire alarm components supplied from the same control equipment and protected against overcurrent by the same protective device(s) or current limitation arrangements) 

so we now have 

All fault Led's and Buzzers and their assembly of fire alarm components supplied from the same control equipment and protected against overcurrent by the same protective device(s) or current limitation arrangements should be checked, where practicable, by simulation of fault conditions. 

now on my panel i have single fault LED and a Single Buzzer which are common to all loops and sounder circuits so for each "circuit" i need to make sure that the LED and Buzzer still work. so i need to find a practicable way of doing this. So i remove a head and the LED comes on and the Buzzer sounds
at this point I have successfully tested the fault indicators and fully complied with the standard.

the point of the clause is to make sure that the fault LED and Buzzer work not just by pressing a button on the panel but by doing something on the field wiring. and the most practical thing i can think of is removed a head

I don't think we should short loops, the committee of PD 6531 does not think you should short loops, and have said so, in a handy to read document which we can show to the poor misguided fools that think we should short circuit loops
www.fia.uk.com

Technical Manager FIA

All comments and views are mine own and may not reflect the views of FIA
Reply
#6
I'm sure as fcuk let some [email protected] dictate to me that I should short a circuit knowing here is a good chance that it going to cause a serious issue and cost me time and a fair few quid to repair.

I'd tell him to FO and remove me from their scheme (we all know that isn't going to happen).


At the end of the day, these little hitlers are just men like me and you, they have no power over us, they think they do and that's why they do what they do, fcuk em.
Reply
#7
Now adi don’t hold back tell us how you really feel
www.fia.uk.com

Technical Manager FIA

All comments and views are mine own and may not reflect the views of FIA
Reply
#8
(03-05-2018, 11:41 PM)Adi Wrote: I'm sure as fcuk let some [email protected] dictate to me that I should short a circuit knowing here is a good chance that it going to cause a serious issue and cost me time and a fair few quid to repair.

I'd tell him to FO and remove me from their scheme (we all know that isn't going to happen).


At the end of the day, these little hitlers are just men like me and you, they have no power over us, they think they do and that's why they do what they do, fcuk em.

Nice to know I'm not the only Mr Angry on the forum mate  Biggrin Biggrin
Martin Wison
KGM Fire and Security Distribution Ltd.
Rochester, Kent.
01634 716882
http://www.kgmfireandsecurity.co.uk
Reply
#9
(04-05-2018, 08:38 AM)MD Martin Wrote:
(03-05-2018, 11:41 PM)Adi Wrote: I'm sure as fcuk let some [email protected] dictate to me that I should short a circuit knowing here is a good chance that it going to cause a serious issue and cost me time and a fair few quid to repair.

I'd tell him to FO and remove me from their scheme (we all know that isn't going to happen).


At the end of the day, these little hitlers are just men like me and you, they have no power over us, they think they do and that's why they do what they do, fcuk em.

Nice to know I'm not the only Mr Angry on the forum mate  Biggrin Biggrin
And nice to know that we get support from the right people (Will)  Biggrin Biggrin Biggrin
Peter Robinson




07889 038650

Reply
#10
Can we hit them with the book??
Gent 24 Integrator, Edwards EST 3 Strategic Partner, Siemens Technology Partner
Reply


Possibly Related Threads...
Thread Author Replies Views Last Post
  new hmo standards for 1st ocober 2018 alonso 9 880 21-04-2018, 10:36 AM
Last Post: Michaelwgroves

Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)